Neutralization: New Insights into the Problem of Employee Systems Security Policy Violations
By Mikko T. Siponen, Anthony Vance. MIS Q., 2010
896 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ea84690d602a488f7712bc2f6901e3eb7b4270a9
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- Paul Benjamin Lowry
- Allen C. Johnston
- Robert E. Crossler
- John D'Arcy
- Merrill Warkentin
- Qing Hu
- Gregory Moody
- Robert Willison
Citations in the corpus
- Managing Employee Compliance with Information Security Policies: The Critical Role of Top Management and Organizational Culture (2012, background): “…security has put strong emphasis on individual cognitive processes (e.g., Boss et al., 2009; Bulgurcu et al., 2010; Johnston & Warkentin, 2010; Siponen & Vance, 2010; Hu et al., 2011), this study calls for attention to how organizational level factors influence the cognitive processes, thus…”
- Toward a Unified Model of Information Security Policy Compliance (2018, methodology): “The scenario approach presents a scenario that describes a case and context where the scenario character typically violates a law, norm, or policy (Pogarsky 2004; Siponen and Vance 2010).”
- Beyond Deterrence: An Expanded View of Employee Computer Abuse (2013, background): “2011 ; Siponen and Vance 2010 ) .”
- A Model of Neutralization Techniques (2018, methodology): “The use of this technique can be initiated by portraying the norm as too restrictive (Siponen and Vance 2010), too ambitious (Lanier and Henry 2004), too vague, complex, and inconsistent (Ashforth and Anand 2003).”
- An Enhanced Fear Appeal Rhetorical Framework: Leveraging Threats to the Human Asset Through Sanctioning Rhetoric (2015, methodology): “The five-item reflective measure of sanction celerity and the three-item formal and informal varieties of sanction severity and sanction certainty were also adapted from previously validated instruments (Paternoster and Simpson 1996; Siponen and Vance 2010).”
- A review and analysis of deterrence theory in the IS security literature: making sense of the disparate findings (2011, background): “By negative behavior, we are referring to behavior that is considered disruptive of IS security, such as IS misuse in D’Arcy et al (2009) or security policy violation in Siponen & Vance (2010).”